The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Fun with the Olympus E-M1

Brian Mosley

New member
Godfrey, sadly I sold my E-1 some years ago, but I have very fond memories of using it... could you please share your views of how the E-M1 compares in terms of ergonomics and use?

Thanks

Brian
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
Godfrey, sadly I sold my E-1 some years ago, but I have very fond memories of using it... could you please share your views of how the E-M1 compares in terms of ergonomics and use?
Hmm. I've been using the E-1 since 2008 and the E-M1 for a little over two weeks. Comparing them, the E-M1:

- is far more configurable
- is much faster in operation
- has a little sharper shutter sound
- is smaller and thinner without the grip, thinner with the grip
- has a better viewfinder.

The E-M1 is a deeper study, like the E-5 was compared to the E-1.

What I find which is similar is the capability to disappear in your hands and let you get on with the business in hand. Truly lovely*camera designs, both of them.

G
 

Brian Mosley

New member
Thanks,

I remember shooting with the E-1 + 14-54... It was a delight to work with, something about the light weight, perfect size and beautiful soft shutter sound.

I get a different feeling with the E-M1, the E-1 still had an analogue feel somehow... Whereas the E-M1 feels quietly precise and much more digital - at least until I've got the muscle memory down for all the controls.

It's definitely inspiring me to want to get out and shoot!

Kind regards

Brian
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
I remember shooting with the E-1 + 14-54... It was a delight to work with, something about the light weight, perfect size and beautiful soft shutter sound.

I get a different feeling with the E-M1, the E-1 still had an analogue feel somehow... Whereas the E-M1 feels quietly precise and much more digital - at least until I've got the muscle memory down for all the controls.

It's definitely inspiring me to want to get out and shoot!
The E-1's sensor, relatively heavy antialiasing filter, and 5 Mpixel resolution is so well tuned it is absolutely astonishing how good the photos it makes can look. Definitely tuned to delight a film enthusiast's eye...


Olympus E-1 + ZD 11-22/2.8-3.5

The E-1 and 35 Macro is another amazing kit. Perfect balance, light and handy yet tough and reliable. The same seems to be true of the E-M1 + either of the Summilux-DG 25/1.4 or Lumix G 14/2.5. That little Panasonic 14mm lens is surprising me with its quality and capability.

The E-M1 does feel sharper, better defined, crisper to the eye. I am loathe to use the word "digital" as it lacks meaning. The difference I see in imaging is much like the difference going from Kodachrome 64 in 35mm to Ektachrome 120 with the Hasselblad.

Inspiring stuff. My hands are getting very comfortable on the E-M1 now, I'm not making as many mistakes now that all the controls work the way I want them to. Olympus did a bang up job on the control layout with this camera, just like with the E-1.

G
 

scott kirkpatrick

Well-known member
Godfrey, I also have fond memories of the E-1 and have purchased an 11-22 Zuiko zoom to use on the E-M1 that I hope to receive next month. I used my E-1 from 2003 or 4 until 2007, when it was lost to burglars, along with a nice suite of lenses. My other favorite from that time was the 50/2.0 macro, but I think the 45/1.8 M43 current generation lens has overtaken that one. I've been using my new 11-22 on an E-PL5 in the meantime. Here's the old lens and old body (from 2004):



I don't recall obsessing over the "heavy AA filtering," in fact I didn't know what that meant back them. And now the new 11-22, on a new E-PL5 generation sensor and body:



scott
 

deckitout

New member
Some great composition in some of those shots Godfrey, you have made some ordinary subject matter look very interesting.

Phil
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
Thank you all for the likes and comments!
Liking this camera a lot. It does what I want, inspires me to use it more.



G
 

biglouis

Well-known member
Can I ask the same question I have posed before:

Olympus cameras and Panasonic lenses - do you get the same level of corrections that you get if you mount the lens on a Panasonic body?

I'd always hoped that the GH-3 would be the camera for me but (a) it was too expensive at launch to be taken seriously, and (b) it was too movie-centric for a stills photographer.

I am beginning to crack again for m43rds but it would seem everyone thinks this new EM-1 is better than the Panasonic bodies (GH-3, GX7)?

LouisB
 

tashley

Subscriber Member
Louis, be a bit careful about using Panny lenses on Oly bodies: I know that the theoretical proposition behind the MFT system is open standards and cross-compatibility of lenses but in practice this seems, to me, to mean that the lens mounts and electronic contacts are shared but the processing is only sometimes shared - and given how heavily the system relies on in-camera application of corrections, even to the extent of 'half-baking' the RAW files, this is sometimes a problem.

I am not sure what the 'official' answer is as to the exact degree to which Oly and Panny 'process' according to each others' lens correction data but I do know that for at least one of my lenses, the Panny 7-14, it seems that geometric distortions are correction but other problems are not: I have terrible purple ghosting and flare in any shot with a light source in frame when I use this otherwise great lens on the EM-1. I also plan to test my hypothesis that the the system of using focal length data to make Auto ISO shutter speed decisions may not be fully cross-compatible. Frankly, the shutter speeds my EM-1 selects are so high that I might as well have no IBIS - but so far (as a GH-2 switcher) all my lenses are Panny.
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
This question has come up from time to time since 2008 when Micro-FourThirds was first released. I've been working with FourThirds and Micro-FourThirds cameras since 2007, and there were similar questions then about Olympus-Panasonic compatibility with the FourThirds bodies.

On the FourThirds lens front, the differences between the four lenses Panasonic produced and the Olympus lens line are small, but curiously significant. FourThirds lenses did not include the lens correction protocol specification used in Micro-FourThirds, all lens corrections for Olympus were embedded in the Olympus image processing software (Studio and Viewer) and were specific to the Olympus ZD lenses. Panasonic at first built aperture rings onto the lens bodies (14-50/2.8-3.5, 25/1.4, and 14-150/3.5-5.6 lenses) which are soft ... the Olympus bodies didn't recognize them at all, but the body controls for aperture worked the same way with these lenses. Panasonic bodies had firmware control to allow Olympus lenses to be used with on-body controls for the aperture. Another interesting twist is that three of the four Panasonic lenses (all but the original 14-50/2.8-3.5) include the full lens correction parameter suite used in Micro-FourThirds in their firmware, even though no FourThirds SLR bodies read it ... the Micro-FourThirds bodies read it and use it.

The Micro-FourThirds mount protocol specification articulates parameters for geometric corrections and lateral chromatic aberration corrections. These are part of the coordinated standard between Panasonic and Olympus. The lenses provide these parameters to the bodies. It's up to the bodies to accept and use them.

  • Olympus lenses have (until now) supplied only geometric corrections according to the protocol specification. This might be changing with the latest generation of lenses.
  • Panasonic lenses have supplied both geometric and CA aberration corrections according to the specification.
  • Olympus bodies (until now) have accepted and implemented using only the geometric corrections. This might be changing now with the E-M1 and later bodies.
  • Panasonic bodies have accepted and implemented using both sets of corrections.

Olympus image processing software (Studio and Viewer) has always included both geometric and CA correction information for the entire Olympus lens line, the Micro-FourThirds lenses were added to this. Olympus has now additionally embedded that lens correction library into the E-M1. This library is what's responsible for diffraction correction and other per-lens special optimizations. They do not include Panasonic, Sigma, Voigtländer or any other lens families in it, as might be expected.

My personal use has been the Panasonic G1 and GF1 bodies with Olympus FT, Panasonic and Panasonic/Leica FT and mFT lenses from 2008 to 2010, and in the past year the Olympus E-PL1 and now E-M1 bodies with Olympus FT and Panasonic, Panasonic/Leica mFT lenses. I've had no problems at all using the lenses and bodies interchangeably. Some lenses are more dependent upon the lens correction parameters than others. For instance, the Panasonic 20mm used on an Olympus body corrects geometrically but not for CA, so I need to add that in LR. The Macro-Elmarit 45/2.8 ASPH OIS is interesting as it supplies both geometric and CA corrections but both are set to null ... neither make bodie does any corrections when using it.

The larger set of corrections/filtering improvements for Olympus lenses will be performed by the E-M1, but I wouldn't make the lack of them into an issue for using Panasonic and Panasonic/Leica lenses. The Panasonic 14mm f/2.5 and Panasonic/Leica Summilux-DG 25mm f/1.4 ASPH both perform beautifully on the E-M1, despite that I need to apply lens CA corrections manually (at least with the 14mm ... haven't seen any CA with the Summilux). I'll probably acquire the Macro-Elmarit 45mm, the Summilux 15mm, and the Nocticron 43mm as well over time, as I have found the Panasonic/Leica lenses just "do the right thing" for me visually.

G
 

raist3d

Well-known member
Part of the reason why the new protocol under micro four thirds for corrections is because the micro four thirds lenses are more compromised designs or designs under more constraints than 4/3rds lenses were. Gone is tele centricity. Part of the reason there wasn't a particular need to expand on the corrections is because the 4/3rd lenses didn't really need them.

I still expect the better lenses in the m4/3rds system to perform at least a step above the nominal need for corrections, and as things move forward - like the new emerging pro lenses and the panny-leica lenses, research etc, things will continue to improve more on the optical side of things.

- Ricardo
 

deckitout

New member
Can I ask the same question I have posed before:

Olympus cameras and Panasonic lenses - do you get the same level of corrections that you get if you mount the lens on a Panasonic body?

I'd always hoped that the GH-3 would be the camera for me but (a) it was too expensive at launch to be taken seriously, and (b) it was too movie-centric for a stills photographer.

I am beginning to crack again for m43rds but it would seem everyone thinks this new EM-1 is better than the Panasonic bodies (GH-3, GX7)?

LouisB
Louis

I have a GH3 and waiting for the EM1 to arrive

The GH3 from an ergonomic perspective is the best handling M/43 camera for me to date. I used a GX7 for a week and also liked that.
The sheer amount of direct access buttons make it a joy to set up and use.

My heart always says Oly but my hands normally say Panny, I will soon have a EM1 to compare

Phil
 
Top